[acimim_ha]

> locations on the moon where conditions are ideal for the study of the early universe.

Doesn't get me particularly excited personally. Scientists should be aware other people have different interests. I want a futurama lunapark.

In the end, government is going to decide. After some war/conflicts. Just like on Earth.

[dguest]

I want a lunapark too.

Until then I'm just another stupid scientist. But I'm aware that other people have different interests. I think the people who are calling for areas to be preserved are aware too, which is why they are trying to start a dialogue.

[Aerroon]

But the dialogue is really this:

>I want to study X and to do that I need Y. And you're going to give it to me because it might help our scientific understanding. Probably. Maybe.

Science overall is useful, but whether any individual part of it is useful is a lot more questionable. What gets studied is about what a (willful) scientist wants to study.

I suspect that people setting up something economically useful on the moon would actually end up being more valuable for science. It would mean that there will be economical access to the moon. If it's government-funded and science-led, then the whole thing might end on some political whim.

[odyssey7]

This dialogue from Smithsonian Magazine seems somewhat confused. Protecting the moon from development is a valid position to take; and somehow, to the contrary, the article promotes various scientific development projects. It's disingenuous to advocate for position A while calling it position ¬A.

[pryelluw]

I too dream with being a whaler on the moon.

[cdelsolar]

We carry a harpoon